Control of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes without weight loss by

Many thanks, Roger, for this very interesting study.

The only initial objection I might have is this statement:

"On the LoBAG20 diet, the glycohemoglobin decreased from 9.8% to 7.6%
over the 5 weeks of the study. Extrapolating the data to ~120 days
(~15 weeks),
theoretically, the glycohemoglobin would be 5.4%, which is within the
normal range."

This last theoretical sentence (premise), to my mind, falls into the
realm of supposition. It's a pity the study was not continued to
ascertain whether or not that conclusion would have been true for the
participants.

Best wishes,
Amy

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:13:36 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

|Background: Over the past several years our research group has taken a
|systematic,
|comprehensive approach to determining the effects on body function (hormonal
|and nonhormonal)
|of varying the amounts and types of proteins, carbohydrates and fats in the
|diet. We have been particularly interested in the dietary management of type
|2 diabetes.
|Our objective has been to develop a diet for people with type 2 diabetes
|that does not
|require weight loss, oral agents, or insulin, but that still controls the
|blood glucose
|concentration. Our overall goal is to enable the person with type 2 diabetes
|to control
|their blood glucose by adjustment in the composition rather than the amount
|of food in
|their diet.
|Methods: This paper is a brief summary and review of our recent diet-related
|research,
|and the rationale used in the development of diets that potentially are
|useful in the
|treatment of diabetes.
|Results: We determined that, of the carbohydrates present in the diet,
|absorbed glucose
|is largely responsible for the food-induced increase in blood glucose
|concentration. We
|also determined that dietary protein increases insulin secretion and lowers
|blood glucose.
|Fat does not significantly affect blood glucose, but can affect insulin
|secretion and
|modify the absorption of carbohydrates. Based on these data, we tested the
|efficacy of
|diets with various protein:carbohydrate:fat ratios for 5 weeks on blood
|glucose control in
|people with untreated type 2 diabetes. The results were compared to those
|obtained in
|the same subjects after 5 weeks on a control diet with a
|protein:carbohydrate:fat ratio of
|15:55:30. A 30:40:30 ratio diet resulted in a moderate but significant
|decrease in 24-hour
|integrated glucose area and % total glycohemoglobin (%tGHb). A 30:20:50
|ratio diet
|resulted in a 38% decrease in 24-hour glucose area, a reduction in fasting
|glucose to near
|normal and a decrease in %tGHb from 9.8% to 7.6%. The response to a 30:30:40
|ratio
|diet was similar.
|Conclusion: Altering the diet composition could be a patient-empowering
|method of
|improving the hyperglycemia of type 2 diabetes without weight loss or
|pharmacologic
|intervention.
|
|http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/pdf/1743-7075-3-16.pdf
|

Interesting, the article reaffirms my exact experience. Even when not
losing weight my bg's have stayed under control by maintaining a
certain ratio of protein-fat-carbs. They say
fat 50%
protein 30%
carbs 20%
had the best results , although they didn't say that they tried a diet
with even higher fat/lower carb ratio.

I try to keep my ratio at around:
fat 65%
protein25%
carbs 10%

Yeah, it would've been kewl if they'd looked at more ratios.

My goal is around 60-65% fat, 20-30% protein, 10-15% carb at around
1400 total kilocalories.

I don't tend to think of ratios with regards to bg though. I figure
aiming at a maximum level of carbs for bg control, a minimum of protein
(but avoid going *too* far over the minimum cause that can raise bg
too), and then just filling in the rest with fat.

In alt.support.diabetes Amy said:

Many thanks, Roger, for this very interesting study.

Quoted message said:

The only initial objection I might have is this statement:

Quoted message said:

"On the LoBAG20 diet, the glycohemoglobin decreased from 9.8% to 7.6%
over the 5 weeks of the study. Extrapolating the data to ~120 days
(~15 weeks),
theoretically, the glycohemoglobin would be 5.4%, which is within the
normal range."

Quoted message said:

This last theoretical sentence (premise), to my mind, falls into the
realm of supposition. It's a pity the study was not continued to
ascertain whether or not that conclusion would have been true for the
participants.

It's very hard to acquire extra continuation funding to explore
results which might turn up during a funded study. It's not the way
research grants work, perhaps regrettably. They expect you to take the
results of the first study, arue the case for the utility of the
further exploration, and make a new research grant application.
Generally speaking these things can't be done quickly.

However, given what we know about the relationship of BG averages to
HbA1c measurements, it's a supposition which it would be rather
surprising to see turn out to be false in more than minor detail.

It's useful for the original researchers to make that kind of
theoretical projection in their published findings, because it
strengthens the case for funding any further researchers who wish to
test that supposition.

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Roger Zoul said:

Background: Over the past several years our research group has taken a
systematic,
comprehensive approach to determining the effects on body function (hormonal
and nonhormonal)
of varying the amounts and types of proteins, carbohydrates and fats in the
diet. We have been particularly interested in the dietary management of type
2 diabetes.
Our objective has been to develop a diet for people with type 2 diabetes
that does not
require weight loss, oral agents, or insulin, but that still controls the
blood glucose
concentration.

Weight loss is neither a requirement nor a function of diet but a
function of eating less.

Quoted message said:

Our overall goal is to enable the person with type 2 diabetes
to control
their blood glucose by adjustment in the composition rather than the amount
of food in
their diet.

It is clear that the members of this research group know that folks
with type 2 diabetes can control their blood glucose simply by reducing
the amount of food that they are eating.

Will be available to "glow" and chat about this and other things like
cardiology, diabetes, Bird Flu, the 2006 global earthquake advisory for
03/29/06, cooking and nutrition that interest those following this
thread here during the next on-line chat (03/30/06) from 5 to 6 pm EST,
LORD willing:

http://tinyurl.com/8w7uq

For those who are put off by the signature, my advance apologies for
how the LORD has reshaped me:

http://tinyurl.com/7mcuo

Prayerfully in Christ's love,

Andrew
http://tinyurl.com/rgsp8

On 25 Mar 2006 04:15:06 -0800, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

|
|It is clear that the members of this research group know that folks
|with type 2 diabetes can control their blood glucose simply by reducing
|the amount of food that they are eating.

|Andrew

Once again, Chung is talking out his crossposting ass.

What you eat matters as much, or more, as how much you eat.
--

Peter

Chris Malcolm wrote:

It's very hard to acquire extra continuation funding to explore
results which might turn up during a funded study. It's not the way
research grants work, perhaps regrettably. They expect you to take the
results of the first study, arue the case for the utility of the
further exploration, and make a new research grant application.
Generally speaking these things can't be done quickly.
However, given what we know about the relationship of BG averages to
HbA1c measurements, it's a supposition which it would be rather
surprising to see turn out to be false in more than minor detail.

It's useful for the original researchers to make that kind of
theoretical projection in their published findings, because it
strengthens the case for funding any further researchers who wish to
test that supposition.

--------------------------------------

Hi Chris, thanks for that. I appreciate that it comes down to
funding, time, etc.
I wasn't questioning the veracity of their hypothesis, so much as
saying that it's regrettable that the study wasn't able to provide that
final conclusion in real terms. I suspect, if it had been able to
provide real figures, as opposed to theoretical ones, for its
continuation into normal range BGs / HbA1c, that would carry much more
weight within the medical community. Just a guess on my part. (A
scientist I am not, just a wannabe :-)

Cheers,
Amy

I don't even want to read about a way to reduce diabetes by NOT losing
weight, I weight 260 and the doc said my last blood numbers were
prediabetic. I began the process of shedding a bunch of weight and
totally changing my diet (no more sugar, snacks etc. and way less
calories) last month. This news in black and white on the tests has
really kicked me into gear.

Good for you. You are a step ahead of it, and I wish you the best with
control.

--
Cheri

frenchy wrote in message
<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I don't even want to read about a way to reduce diabetes by NOT losing
weight, I weight 260 and the doc said my last blood numbers were
prediabetic. I began the process of shedding a bunch of weight and
totally changing my diet (no more sugar, snacks etc. and way less
calories) last month. This news in black and white on the tests has
really kicked me into gear.